California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Theses Digitization Project John M. Pfau Library 2003 Looking into phrasal verbs David Immanuel Kovitz Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project Part of the Linguistics Commons Recommended Citation Kovitz, David Immanuel, "Looking into phrasal verbs" (2003). Theses Digitization Project. 2362. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/2362 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses Digitization Project by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LOOKING INTO PHRASAL VERBS A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in English Composition I by i David Immanuel Kovitz June 2003 I i i i LOOKING INTO PHRASAL VERBS A Thesis i Presented to the i Faculty of i California State University, i San Bernardino by David Immanuel Kovitz June 2003 Approved by: Date Dr. Wendy Smith, Professor i I ABSTRACT The phrasal verb is a unique type of verb phrase that consists of a main verb, most always of only one or two syllables, followed by a particle, that together work as a i single semantic unit. Such meaning, however, is i characteristically expressed in idiomatic terms, which I poses aj formidable problem for students of English as a second language in that, to be understood, the meaning must I be figuratively interpreted as well as literally translated. i I Consider the phrase chew out. Newcomers to English i likely know chew firsthand as the verb meaning "a process I of ingesting food." The particle out, taken at face value, I I i can apply spatially (e.g., outside), operationally (e.g., ! lights gut), or quantitatively (e.g., out of time). But how is one to guess that, as a combined form, chew out means to scold? In the minds of newcomers, the resultant meaning is unpredictable given the words used to express it. The semantic ambiguity of phrasal verbs presents a pedagogical problem that can be tackled from the premise that phrasal verbs are in fact systematically coherent in iii I I I terms of perceptual underpinnings to the words at play. The premise continues in that since phrasal verbs'are so I often figurative in nature, the explication of metaphor I should t»e factored into their instruction. I argue accordingly that George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's theory, that metaphor is integral to how we instinctively use i common fyords in everyday expressions, can prove instrumental in devising a better way of teaching phrasal verbs. ' The semantic capacity of a simple word, in terms of i metaphor, context, and conventional usage, can extend to i include|a variety of meanings. The purpose here is to draw upon Lakoff and Johnson's theory as a way to help students i to appreciate the expressive potential of such words. This thesis thus details how metaphor, linguistically evident in so many! ways, and especially so in phrasal verbs, can be I exploited as a means of explaining how and why phrasal I verbs act as they do. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Without the spirit and support of those acknowledged here, this project could never have come to fruition. My parents; above all, motivated me from the beginning by j teaching me to appreciate language in its nuance, whether structural, pragmatic, humorous, aesthetic, or any combination thereof. i My,readers, Dr. Chen, Dr. Hyon, and Dr. Smith, have motivated me as well through their approach to the i discipline of linguistics, and through their readiness, and . I willingness, to extend their talent and skill on behalf of their students. Without my sister Johanna's unflinching emotional (and i technical) support, I would have been incapacitated on a number of occasions. Gratitude as well to Michael Blind, who throjugh his empathy and generosity, provided sanctuary indispensable to the completion of this project. To lall, I am deeply indebted. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .............................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................ v LIST OF TABLES .......................................... vii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .............................. 1 CHAPTER TWO: THE PROBLEM Syntactic Properties ........... .................. 12 Lexicon 16 I Idiomaticity 22 Textbook Treatment 29 CHAPTER THREE: THE ROLE OF METAPHOR 41 Lakoff and Johnson's Theory .... ................ 43 i i Metaphoric Aspects to Phrasal Verbs ............. 50 Plugging Into Lakoff and Johnson's Categories ... 70 CHAPTER J FOUR: SOME TEACHING SUGGESTIONS.............. 92 A possible Lesson.................. .............. 101 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION.......................... 113 APPENDIX A: ACTIVE IS UP.................. ............ 118 APPENDIX B: MORE IS UP ................................. 121 i APPENDIX C: ACTIVITIES ARE SUBSTANCES ................ 123 REFERENCES .............................................. 125 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Versions of run .......................... 7 Table 2. Prevalent Particles ........... .......... 52 I I Table 3. Main Verbs Derived from Nouns ........... 57 Table 4. Narrowly-defined Main Verbs ............. 60 Table 5. Open-ended Main Verbs .................... 64 Table 6 J Metaphoric Categories .................... 71 i Table 7 J "Communication is Sending" .............. 84 I i I I i i i i i i i vii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Consider the following hypothetical exchange between non-native speaker of English (X) and native speaker (Y) . (X) : I hear you are 50 today. Happy Birthday! (Y) : Don't bring it up. Failing to understand the phrase bring it up as an idiom, (X) is taken aback, not only by the abruptness of the response, but also because the phrase itself has no I apparent link to the gambit. Tod inexperienced both in English and in the cultural background that English entails, (X) is unable to infer that (Y) might not welcome his own fiftieth birthday. (X) is thus unable to venture an appropriate answer. If (X) knows that bring up, in addition to meaning physically carry to a higher elevation, can also mean bring attention to, then this awkward conversational moment is avoided. But if not, then how is (X) to guess the alternative definition? i The! expression bring up, used here in its figurative sense, is a grammatical structure commonly known as the phrasal verb, a verb + particle combination that functions 1 as a single semantic unit. The term "particle" refers to the adverb or preposition (in this case, up) as a phrasal i verb component. Thus we have expressions such as give up (quit), ! tell on (inform on someone), and wig out (lose control);, whereby the meaning is often not readily ascertained from the literal meanings of the component words. The verb and its companion particle fuse semantically to produce a hybrid meaning that emerges unpredictably from the constituents. The idiomatic i meanings of phrasal verbs are thus embedded in other terms. As such, the phrasal verb poses a frustrating problem for learners of English as a second or foreign language. To pursue this point in detail, consider the three forms in list 1. I (1), bring (it) up i (2 )■ turn (it) over to I (3) run into Each of these phrases can be construed at least two I ways, as exemplified below. (la) bring (deliver) pizza up to the campsite. j (lb) bring (mention) pizza up as a suggestion. (2a) turn over (flip upside down) a stone. 2 (2b) turn over (give opportunity to speak) to someone else. (3a) run into (enter) the building. (31o) run into (encounter) a friend at the store. The optional meanings of each pair, listed as (a) and (b), are instinctively known by native speakers, but newcomers to English are likely hard-pressed to make sense of the idiomatic versions (lb, 2b, and 3b). To a native speaker, each of the phrasal verbs in List 1 is understandable. In bring up, the idea of procurement is consistent, whether as a physical act (la) or In terms of discourse (lb); to bring something up in conversation is close conceptually to the act of something 'appearing' {.bring} 'from a submerged state' {up) . Turn over, as an i idiom alluding to a social act in (2b), similarly derives from a physical basis, in this case the changing of position or direction in (2a). When we say "turn over the I microphone," we more often mean relinquish its use to another person than position it upside down. And run into is, in effect, synonymous as a verb phrase in (3a, 3b), no i matter Whom or what encountered. The interpersonal aspect of run into in (3b) logically derives from the kinetic I aspect of run in (3a). A native speaker of English knows 3 I that running into someone only means that one person I actually crashes into another if so specified; it can just I as easily mean that one encounters someone or something by chance, j We can physically run into someone on the football field, or, we can socially run into someone at the football game. As an idiom, run into transposes the physical i essence J of run to another context. In all of the examples above, we can see how the meaning of the phrasal verb I extends I figuratively from a literal origin. I Ini addition to having idiomatic quality, phrasal verbs I have pragmatic value as well. Again, consider turn over. Imagine!speaking at an informal meeting and the time has i come to|introduce another speaker. Unless protocol requires specialized discourse, one would probably say Now I let's turn it over to . rather than putting it some i other way, such as the options in list 2: i (1) : Now I will ask ... to speak. (2) i Now . .will begin speaking. I (3) ' Now let me introduce . i (4) | Now it's .